The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hanging has been the principal form of execution in Britain since the 5th Century, although other methods such as drowning, burial alive, hurling from cliffs, beheading, boiling alive and shooting have been used at various times. Here are a few facts about the death penalty:-
1) 5th Century. Hanging first introduced as a method of execution in Anglo-Saxon Britain.
2) 1196. William Fitz Osbert became the first to hang at Tyburn (for sedition).
3) Circa 1500. Eight capital crimes defined : Treason, petty treason, murder, robbery, larceny, rape and arson.
4) 1787. Transportation replaced hanging, in practice, for many felonies. In the decade 1784 - 1793 there were 434 hangings ordered by the London and Middlesex court (which became the Old Bailey). In the next ten years this dropped to 165 and to 119 in the decade from 1804 - 1813. Prisoners convicted of a first time felony (other than murder, coining forgery and arson) frequently had their death sentences commuted to transportation and this practice carried on until around 1857 by which time very few people were being hanged for crimes other than murder. The minimum time of transportation was 7 years and could be up to the rest of the prisoner's life. Only about 5% of those sentenced to transportation actually ever returned to Britain. Transportation was formally abolished in 1868.
5) 18th March 1789. The last burning at the stake took place at Newgate when Catherine (or Christian) Murphy was executed for High Treason (coining).
6) 1814 Last hanging under the "Black Act" - William Potter for the crime of cutting down an orchard. Even the judge petitioned for a reprieve!
7) 1861. Criminal Law Consolidation Act reduced the number of capital crimes to four : murder, treason (including arson in Royal Naval dockyards), mutiny and piracy.
8) 26th May 1868. Last fully public hanging in England. Michael Barrett at Newgate for the Fenian bombing at Clerkenwell which killed seven people.
9) 1902. Holloway converted to become London's female prison.
10) 1908. The execution of persons under 16 outlawed by the Children's Act of that year.
11) 1931. Sentence of Death (Expectant Mothers) Act 1931. Pregnant women were no longer to be hanged after giving birth. (Mary Ann Cotton became the last to suffer at Durham Castle on 24th March 1873, her baby being taken from her before execution)
12) 27th January 1999. The Home Secretary (Jack Straw) formally signed the 6th protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights in Strasbourg, on behalf of the British government formally abolishing the death penalty in the UK. It had been still theoretically available for treason and piracy up to then but it was extremely unlikely that even if anyone had been convicted of these crimes over the preceeding 30 years that they would have actually been executed. Successive Home Secretaries had always reprieved persons sentenced to death in the Channel Islands and Isle of Man where the death sentence for murder could still be passed and the Royal Prerogative was observed.
In Britain, between abolition in 1964 and 1999, the murder rate more than doubled (to around 750 per annum) and there have been 71 murders committed by people who have been released after serving "life sentences" in the same period, according to Home Office statistics. Statistics were kept for the 5 years that capital punishment was suspended in Britain (1965 - 1969) and these showed a 125% rise in murders that would have attracted a death sentence. Whilst statistically all this is true it does not tell one how society has changed over the those 34 years. It may well be that the murder rate would be the same today if we had retained and continued to use the death penalty. It impossible to say that only this one factor affects the murder rate. Easier divorce has greatly reduced the number of domestic murders, unavailability of poisons has seen poisoning become almost extinct, whilst tight gun control has reduced the number of shootings. However stabbings have increased dramatically as have the kicking and beating to death of people who have "looked at me funny" or "been eyeing up my girlfriend" i.e. vicious and virtually motiveless killings. As in America greatly improved medical techniques have saved many victims who would have previously died from their injuries (e.g. Josie Russell).
But will Britain restore capital punishment in the future? In the short term (say the next 10 years) the answer is definitely not. Successive free votes on the issue in the Commons have failed to get anywhere near a majority for restoration. There is no doubt that capital punishment is a very emotive issue and there is a strong anti death penalty lobby in this country who would put every obstacle in the way of it's return should it ever become likely.
Re-introduction of something that has been abolished is always much more difficult than introducing something entirely new.
Politically it would also be very difficult given our membership of the EU and our commitment to European Convention on Human Rights, both of which are strongly against capital punishment. The EU contains no member states that practice it and will not allow retentionist states to join. The present Labour government is implacably opposed to capital punishment and has removed it from the statute book for the few remaining offences for which it was still theoretically allowed.
There is also considerable concern at the number of convictions that are being declared unsafe by the Courts, particularly for the most serious offences such as murder and terrorism. Support for the death penalty in Britain seems to be slowly diminishing particularly amongst young people.
Yet we live in a time of ever rising serious crime. Will people become so fed up with escalating levels of crime and what they see in, most cases, as derisory punishments that they will support anything that appears likely to reduce crime and redress the balance? Or do they see the return of capital punishment as a return to barbarity?
I feel that capital punishment should be restored as it will stop people from commiting a lot of crimes. As I said earlier, most crimes have risen since the death penalty was abolished…. People will think… if I kill this person then I will die myself, and they don’t want that, so they won’t do it in the first place.
How do you feel on the subject??? Are you for or against Capital Punishment?
1) 5th Century. Hanging first introduced as a method of execution in Anglo-Saxon Britain.
2) 1196. William Fitz Osbert became the first to hang at Tyburn (for sedition).
3) Circa 1500. Eight capital crimes defined : Treason, petty treason, murder, robbery, larceny, rape and arson.
4) 1787. Transportation replaced hanging, in practice, for many felonies. In the decade 1784 - 1793 there were 434 hangings ordered by the London and Middlesex court (which became the Old Bailey). In the next ten years this dropped to 165 and to 119 in the decade from 1804 - 1813. Prisoners convicted of a first time felony (other than murder, coining forgery and arson) frequently had their death sentences commuted to transportation and this practice carried on until around 1857 by which time very few people were being hanged for crimes other than murder. The minimum time of transportation was 7 years and could be up to the rest of the prisoner's life. Only about 5% of those sentenced to transportation actually ever returned to Britain. Transportation was formally abolished in 1868.
5) 18th March 1789. The last burning at the stake took place at Newgate when Catherine (or Christian) Murphy was executed for High Treason (coining).
6) 1814 Last hanging under the "Black Act" - William Potter for the crime of cutting down an orchard. Even the judge petitioned for a reprieve!
7) 1861. Criminal Law Consolidation Act reduced the number of capital crimes to four : murder, treason (including arson in Royal Naval dockyards), mutiny and piracy.
8) 26th May 1868. Last fully public hanging in England. Michael Barrett at Newgate for the Fenian bombing at Clerkenwell which killed seven people.
9) 1902. Holloway converted to become London's female prison.
10) 1908. The execution of persons under 16 outlawed by the Children's Act of that year.
11) 1931. Sentence of Death (Expectant Mothers) Act 1931. Pregnant women were no longer to be hanged after giving birth. (Mary Ann Cotton became the last to suffer at Durham Castle on 24th March 1873, her baby being taken from her before execution)
12) 27th January 1999. The Home Secretary (Jack Straw) formally signed the 6th protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights in Strasbourg, on behalf of the British government formally abolishing the death penalty in the UK. It had been still theoretically available for treason and piracy up to then but it was extremely unlikely that even if anyone had been convicted of these crimes over the preceeding 30 years that they would have actually been executed. Successive Home Secretaries had always reprieved persons sentenced to death in the Channel Islands and Isle of Man where the death sentence for murder could still be passed and the Royal Prerogative was observed.
In Britain, between abolition in 1964 and 1999, the murder rate more than doubled (to around 750 per annum) and there have been 71 murders committed by people who have been released after serving "life sentences" in the same period, according to Home Office statistics. Statistics were kept for the 5 years that capital punishment was suspended in Britain (1965 - 1969) and these showed a 125% rise in murders that would have attracted a death sentence. Whilst statistically all this is true it does not tell one how society has changed over the those 34 years. It may well be that the murder rate would be the same today if we had retained and continued to use the death penalty. It impossible to say that only this one factor affects the murder rate. Easier divorce has greatly reduced the number of domestic murders, unavailability of poisons has seen poisoning become almost extinct, whilst tight gun control has reduced the number of shootings. However stabbings have increased dramatically as have the kicking and beating to death of people who have "looked at me funny" or "been eyeing up my girlfriend" i.e. vicious and virtually motiveless killings. As in America greatly improved medical techniques have saved many victims who would have previously died from their injuries (e.g. Josie Russell).
But will Britain restore capital punishment in the future? In the short term (say the next 10 years) the answer is definitely not. Successive free votes on the issue in the Commons have failed to get anywhere near a majority for restoration. There is no doubt that capital punishment is a very emotive issue and there is a strong anti death penalty lobby in this country who would put every obstacle in the way of it's return should it ever become likely.
Re-introduction of something that has been abolished is always much more difficult than introducing something entirely new.
Politically it would also be very difficult given our membership of the EU and our commitment to European Convention on Human Rights, both of which are strongly against capital punishment. The EU contains no member states that practice it and will not allow retentionist states to join. The present Labour government is implacably opposed to capital punishment and has removed it from the statute book for the few remaining offences for which it was still theoretically allowed.
There is also considerable concern at the number of convictions that are being declared unsafe by the Courts, particularly for the most serious offences such as murder and terrorism. Support for the death penalty in Britain seems to be slowly diminishing particularly amongst young people.
Yet we live in a time of ever rising serious crime. Will people become so fed up with escalating levels of crime and what they see in, most cases, as derisory punishments that they will support anything that appears likely to reduce crime and redress the balance? Or do they see the return of capital punishment as a return to barbarity?
I feel that capital punishment should be restored as it will stop people from commiting a lot of crimes. As I said earlier, most crimes have risen since the death penalty was abolished…. People will think… if I kill this person then I will die myself, and they don’t want that, so they won’t do it in the first place.
How do you feel on the subject??? Are you for or against Capital Punishment?
Page:
Ingenium Bartender wrote:
> from a cold, analytical side, anyone spending the rest of their life
> in prison at the cost of the taxpayer may as well be dead, since they
> are of no use to society.
>
> Killing them saves the taxpayer money. Cold, brutal analysis is an
> argument FOR capital punishment, it's morality, and the possibility of
> being wrong, which are the arguments against it.
I see your point, but I can't agree with it, and I feel that your logic is pretty darned flawed. Killing anyone over the age of 80 will save 'society' money, but that's hardly an acceptable argument is it? Abolishing the dole will save 'society' money - are you suggesting we do that?
And what about the possibility of killing an innocent, wrongly convincted person - their death will be on the head of 'society' - how can you justify that? Surely that's a more persuasive argument than saving the taxpayer a few bob?
On a different note, the ideal of a modern prison is rehabilitation, not punishment. I do think that there's a problem with the current prison system, given the high rates of reoffending, but I can't suggest a way to solve the problem. We perhaps ought to focus our efforts on ways to improve the rehabilitation system, rather than the knee-jerk revenge of resorting to capital punishment.
> from a cold, analytical side, anyone spending the rest of their life
> in prison at the cost of the taxpayer may as well be dead, since they
> are of no use to society.
>
> Killing them saves the taxpayer money. Cold, brutal analysis is an
> argument FOR capital punishment, it's morality, and the possibility of
> being wrong, which are the arguments against it.
I see your point, but I can't agree with it, and I feel that your logic is pretty darned flawed. Killing anyone over the age of 80 will save 'society' money, but that's hardly an acceptable argument is it? Abolishing the dole will save 'society' money - are you suggesting we do that?
And what about the possibility of killing an innocent, wrongly convincted person - their death will be on the head of 'society' - how can you justify that? Surely that's a more persuasive argument than saving the taxpayer a few bob?
On a different note, the ideal of a modern prison is rehabilitation, not punishment. I do think that there's a problem with the current prison system, given the high rates of reoffending, but I can't suggest a way to solve the problem. We perhaps ought to focus our efforts on ways to improve the rehabilitation system, rather than the knee-jerk revenge of resorting to capital punishment.
Capital Punishment is a definate no. I used to think people deserved it, but since then my views have changed a fair bit. I don't think that ending a life should be the Punishment for... well... ending a life.
I think the lengths of time served in prison should be raised a little, because some sentences don't last half the time they should, which is pretty annoying. They should be extended to what they are actually meant to be, and possibly even a few years more.
Definately a no to Capital Punishment though, as it's just not right.
I think the lengths of time served in prison should be raised a little, because some sentences don't last half the time they should, which is pretty annoying. They should be extended to what they are actually meant to be, and possibly even a few years more.
Definately a no to Capital Punishment though, as it's just not right.
Im for capital punishment, it costs an absolute mint to keep lawbreakers locked up. And not to mention the fact most prisons are equipped with TV's, pool tables, etc... Why the heck should they get the CHANCE to have fun when THEY are the ones who cant follow rules.
BlondeBombShell wrote:
i'm all for Euthinasia
----
I liked his 1st album, but after he did that "Stan" song, I thought he was rubbish
i'm all for Euthinasia
----
I liked his 1st album, but after he did that "Stan" song, I thought he was rubbish
Jonman wrote:
> There's no situation that I can think of where you could claim that
> capital punishment could be morally justifed. Killing someone for
> their actions, no matter how hideous, is plainly wrong. It appeals to
> the emotional side of our personalities, the part that wants revenge,
> but from a cold, analytical side, there's simply no justification.
from a cold, analytical side, anyone spending the rest of their life in prison at the cost of the taxpayer may as well be dead, since they are of no use to society.
Killing them saves the taxpayer money. Cold, brutal analysis is an argument FOR capital punishment, it's morality, and the possibility of being wrong, which are the arguments against it.
> There's no situation that I can think of where you could claim that
> capital punishment could be morally justifed. Killing someone for
> their actions, no matter how hideous, is plainly wrong. It appeals to
> the emotional side of our personalities, the part that wants revenge,
> but from a cold, analytical side, there's simply no justification.
from a cold, analytical side, anyone spending the rest of their life in prison at the cost of the taxpayer may as well be dead, since they are of no use to society.
Killing them saves the taxpayer money. Cold, brutal analysis is an argument FOR capital punishment, it's morality, and the possibility of being wrong, which are the arguments against it.
There's no situation that I can think of where you could claim that capital punishment could be morally justifed. Killing someone for their actions, no matter how hideous, is plainly wrong. It appeals to the emotional side of our personalities, the part that wants revenge, but from a cold, analytical side, there's simply no justification.
Capital punishment is a sanctioned crime. Killing someone is against the law, unless a judge says you can do it. It's hypocrisy of the hightest order.
That's how I see it anyway.
Capital punishment is a sanctioned crime. Killing someone is against the law, unless a judge says you can do it. It's hypocrisy of the hightest order.
That's how I see it anyway.
Rosalind wrote:
> BlondeBombShell wrote:
>
> Hey it's a great discussion topic...... :o)
>
> yep and I love a good discussion.
>
> maybe we should discuss Euthinasia next
yes do.... i'm all for Euthinasia
> BlondeBombShell wrote:
>
> Hey it's a great discussion topic...... :o)
>
> yep and I love a good discussion.
>
> maybe we should discuss Euthinasia next
yes do.... i'm all for Euthinasia
BlondeBombShell wrote:
> Hey it's a great discussion topic...... :o)
yep and I love a good discussion.
maybe we should discuss Euthinasia next
> Hey it's a great discussion topic...... :o)
yep and I love a good discussion.
maybe we should discuss Euthinasia next
The problem with using punishment as a deterrant is that certain types of crime cannot be deterred.
Crimes of passion.
When you're in the grip of strong passionate impulses, the consequences of your action are not forefront on your mind at all. This is an issue that Minority Report brought up well. No planned murders take place any more, only crimes of passion. Why? Everyone knows that murder will get you put on ice indefinitely, and everyone knows that you WILL be caught. Yet the crimes of passion still occur. If the punishment was to be slowly chopped up by some device capable of shaving a tenth of a millimeter off you every 30 seconds, starting at your hands and feet, and working up till you eventually bled to death over the course of a few hours, the crimes would still happen.
However, current methods of reform are equally ineffective. No-one goes to prison to be reformed. If any reform takes place, it's some time between the crime being commited, and the person being caught, trialled and judged. If the criminal still thinks he/she was correct in their actions after this point, chances are they still will be by the time they finish their sentence.
We need something new, like effective hypnotherapy. Calming the aggressive, reforming the minds of kleptomaniacs, and giv ing sex offenders a mental cold shower. However, such a method does not effectively exist, and if it did, would be deemed a violation of human rights by nonsensical do-gooders.
Crimes of passion.
When you're in the grip of strong passionate impulses, the consequences of your action are not forefront on your mind at all. This is an issue that Minority Report brought up well. No planned murders take place any more, only crimes of passion. Why? Everyone knows that murder will get you put on ice indefinitely, and everyone knows that you WILL be caught. Yet the crimes of passion still occur. If the punishment was to be slowly chopped up by some device capable of shaving a tenth of a millimeter off you every 30 seconds, starting at your hands and feet, and working up till you eventually bled to death over the course of a few hours, the crimes would still happen.
However, current methods of reform are equally ineffective. No-one goes to prison to be reformed. If any reform takes place, it's some time between the crime being commited, and the person being caught, trialled and judged. If the criminal still thinks he/she was correct in their actions after this point, chances are they still will be by the time they finish their sentence.
We need something new, like effective hypnotherapy. Calming the aggressive, reforming the minds of kleptomaniacs, and giv ing sex offenders a mental cold shower. However, such a method does not effectively exist, and if it did, would be deemed a violation of human rights by nonsensical do-gooders.
Rosalind wrote:
> Capital punishment will always be a controversial subject. Arguments
> for and against it will continue to fly to and fro.
>
> especially if you start topic asking people for their opinon :)
Hey it's a great discussion topic...... :o)
> Capital punishment will always be a controversial subject. Arguments
> for and against it will continue to fly to and fro.
>
> especially if you start topic asking people for their opinon :)
Hey it's a great discussion topic...... :o)
Page: